05 March 2024

Daily practice questions for CLAT - (05 March 2024)



As stated in Section 13 of the Indian Contract Act, 1932, Free Consent means when both the parties agree or are ready to do a thing in the same sense or harmony. An agreement is incomplete without Free Consent as both the parties should commit to a single thing, and it shows the mutual trust that both the parties have in each other. Let’s take a daily life example of Free Consent for a deeper and Clear Understanding. Suppose, A and B are good friends. A has many sports bikes, but he is moving to London, so he is looking for a buyer for his red and blue bike and B, on the other hand, is fond of sporty Bikes. So A asks B if he wishes to buy his blue bike for 10, 00,000 rs, and B says he loves the bike, but it’s a little expensive for him, so he will pay in installments, and he will be able to pay 8, 00,000 rs for the bike and A accepts his counter offer wholeheartedly, and there is nobody pressuring A to sell his bike in installments or at a lesser price, and nobody is pressuring B to buy A’s bike. So A selling his bike to B is a pure example of Free Consent as both are agreeing with respect to the same blue bike which they have in mind and without any forces such as coercion, undue Influence etc. Some common factors that contribute to the violation of Free Consent are given below:
Coercion: When one party compels or forces the other party to enter into a contract with it by means of threatening or blackmailing. So there exists no free will, and hence it violates Free Consent.
Mistake or Misrepresentations: When there is a lack of communication between two parties, or some other party gets involved in the decision-making, then it gives birth to quarrels and misconceptions. It violates the rule of Free Consent as there is no room for quarrels or fights. It promotes peace.
Undue Influence: When the party with higher authority dominates the other party and decides as per what the party with higher position wants and suppresses the desires of the other party, then it violates the Free Consent as both the parties have equal rights in decision making. It’s mostly seen in husband and wife or tenants and landlords.
Fraud: When one party cheats another party or hides or is dishonest or disloyal or then is no complete transparency between both the parties or if one of the parties fails to commit to its promises, then it’s a case of Fraud.

Question1:- The step-father of Maryam advanced her a certain sum of money when she was 16 and afterwards using his parental influence upon her he obtained a bond of larger amount than the sum owed by Maryam in advance. Determine the party upon whom the burden of proof shall lie to prove undue influence.
  • A. Maryam’s step-father shall prove the absence of undue influence.
  • B. Maryam is required to prove the absence of undue influence.
  • C. Since parents only want the best for their children, Maryam should not sue her step-father.
  • D. It is Maryam’s duty to obey her parents, and hence, no undue influence is exercised here.
Answer is A is correct. The contract in the given case is clearly coloured with elements of undue influence. Here, however, the burden of proof to show absence of undue influence lies on Maryam’s step-father as it is established by law that the party claiming the validity of the contract needs to disprove the element of undue influence in the same. Hence, Option A is the appropriate response.
Question2:- An agent of an insurance company commits fraud with the customers, on the instructions of his principal company, while selling insurance policies on behalf of the employer company. Despite his unwillingness, the agent is told that upon non-compliance with the aforesaid instructions, he will lose his job. Determine the liability under these circumstances.
  • A. The principal company will be held liable for fraud.
  • B. The agent will be held liable for fraud.
  • C. The agent will not be held liable for undue influence.
  • D. The principal company will not be liable for fraud.
Answer is A is correct. The principal company will be held liable for fraud since the acts of the agent were done under the undue influence used by the company over the agent’s employment. Hence, Option A is the appropriate response.
Question3:- what does the term ‘consensus ad idem’ mean in the context of a valid contract?
  • A. Agreeing to the same thing in a different sense.
  • B. Agreeing to the same thing in the same sense.
  • C. Agreeing to a different thing in a different sense.
  • D. Agreeing to nothing in the same sense.
Answer is B is correct. For the enforceability of a legally binding contract, the parties to the contract must agree to the terms and conditions stipulated in the contract in the same sense, i.e. there should be a meeting of the minds. The term ‘consensus ad idem’ means ‘agreeing to the same thing in the same sense. Hence, the appropriate response is Option B.
Question4:- Shaurya is due for a promotion at Shyam’s company. He enters into a contract with Shubham, Shyam's son, for the delivery of 8 shirts for 8,000 INR, which is significantly lower than his usual rate. On the date of delivery, Shaurya fails to deliver the said shirts. Determine his liability under the law.
  • A. Shubham will be liable for using undue influence to contract with Shaurya.
  • B. Shaurya will not be liable as he is a minor, unable to contract under law.
  • C. Shubham will not be liable for breach of contract as he is a hard-working employee.
  • D. Shaurya will be liable for the breach of contract with Shubham.
Answer is A is correct. Shubham has clearly used undue influence to get the shirts from Shaurya at a lower rate than usual. The facts do not state his inability as a minor to enter into a legally binding contract under law, making option B incorrect. Further, Option C provides an incorrect reasoning, whereas Option D is incorrect as the given contract is clearly based on undue influence, which is voidable at the option of Shaurya in this case. Hence, Option A is the correct response.
Question5:- Adam and Brian have been friends since kindergarten. One fine day, after two decades, Adam snatches a packet of biscuits from Brian’s hands and empties it completely before returning it to Brian. Brian wishes to sue Adam. Determine.
  • A. Brian should not sue Adam because they have been friends for a long time.
  • B. Brian can sue Adam for stealing his packet of chips without his consent.
  • C. Brian cannot sue Adam as the court will not consider such a trivial matter.
  • D. Brian can sue Adam because Adam emptied his packet of chips knowingly.
Answer is C is correct. The aforementioned situation is a lucid example of the application of the maxim ‘de minimis non curat lex’, and therefore, the claim by Brian against Adam will not be entertained in a court of law due to the trivial nature of the matter. Therefore, Option C is the correct answer.